Feist−Feist: Theories of
Personality, Seventh
EditionII. Psychodynamic
Theories- Horney: Psychoanalytic
Social Theory
(^172) © The McGraw−Hill
Companies, 2009
166 Part II Psychodynamic Theories
Introduction to Psychoanalytic
Social Theory
The early writings of Karen Horney, like those of Adler, Jung, and Klein, have a dis-
tinctive Freudian flavor. Like Adler and Jung, she eventually became disenchanted
with orthodox psychoanalysis and constructed a revisionist theory that reflected her
own personal experiences—clinical and otherwise.
Although Horney wrote nearly exclusively about neuroses and neurotic per-
sonalities, her works suggest much that is appropriate to normal, healthy develop-
ment. Culture, especially early childhood experiences, plays a leading role in shap-
ing human personality, either neurotic or healthy. Horney, then, agreed with Freud
that early childhood traumas are important, but she differed from him in her insis-
tence that social rather than biological forces are paramount in personality develop-
ment.
Horney and Freud Compared
Horney criticized Freud’s theories on several accounts. First, she cautioned that strict
adherence to orthodox psychoanalysis would lead to stagnation in both theoretical
thought and therapeutic practice (Horney, 1937). Second, Horney (1937, 1939) ob-
jected to Freud’s ideas on feminine psychology, a subject we return to later. Third,
she stressed the view that psychoanalysis should move beyond instinct theory and
emphasize the importance of cultural influences in shaping personality. “Man is
ruled not by the pleasure principle alone but by two guiding principles: safety and
satisfaction” (Horney, 1939, p. 73). Similarly, she claimed that neuroses are not the
result of instincts but rather of the person’s “attempt to find paths through a wilder-
ness full of unknown dangers” (p. 10). This wilderness is created by society and not
by instincts or anatomy.
Despite becoming increasingly critical of Freud, Horney continued to recog-
nize his perceptive insights. Her main quarrel with Freud was not so much the accu-
racy of his observations but the validity of his interpretations. In general terms, she
held that Freud’s explanations result in a pessimistic concept of humanity based on
innate instincts and the stagnation of personality. In contrast, her view of humanity
is an optimistic one and is centered on cultural forces that are amenable to change
(Horney, 1950).
The Impact of Culture
Although Horney did not overlook the importance of genetic factors, she repeatedly
emphasized cultural influences as the primary bases for both neurotic and normal
personality development. Modern culture, she contended, is based on competition
among individuals. “Everyone is a real or potential competitor of everyone else”
(Horney, 1937, p. 284). Competitiveness and the basic hostilityit spawns result in
feelings of isolation. These feelings of being alone in a potentially hostile world lead
to intensified needs for affection,which, in turn, cause people to overvalue love. As
a result, many people see love and affection as the solution for all their problems.
Genuine love, of course, can be a healthy, growth-producing experience; but the des-
perate need for love (such as that shown by Horney herself ) provides a fertile ground